98%
921
2 minutes
20
Background: The aim of this study was to systematically review clinical trials evaluating the flupirtine to identify any biochemical or clinical indicators that could signal serious hepatotoxicity.
Methods: This systematic review included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating flupirtine-containing medicines for any clinical condition. Trials involving any population, comparator, or outcome were considered eligible for inclusion. A comprehensive search was conducted in Embase, MEDLINE, and CENTRAL from their inception until August 14, 2023. The risk of bias (RoB) in the included trials was assessed using Cochrane's 2011 RoB tool. Due to the heterogeneity of the included trials, a meta-analysis could not be performed.
Results: A total of 35 trials published between 1983 and 2022 were included in this systematic review, with 1408 participants receiving flupirtine. Only five trials reported any data related to liver function tests. Among these, four trials documented transient, asymptomatic liver abnormalities that returned to normal after the trial period, while one trial was prematurely terminated. One trial reported normal liver test results in all participants. Of the three trials published after 2018, only one acknowledged the withdrawal of flupirtine from the European market. The majority of risk of bias (RoB) domains were classified as having an unclear risk of bias.
Conclusion: Published RCTs did not report any evidence of serious hepatotoxicity associated with flupirtine based on the available biochemical or clinical data. However, liver function test results were reported in only 5 out of 35 included trials. Published RCTs are not reliable information about flupirtine-related hepatotoxicity.
Registration: Protocol was published in PROSPERO (CRD42018085123).
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00228-025-03840-8 | DOI Listing |
JMIR Hum Factors
September 2025
Seidenberg School of Computer Science and Information Systems, Pace University, New York City, NY, United States.
Background: As information and communication technologies and artificial intelligence (AI) become deeply integrated into daily life, the focus on users' digital well-being has grown across academic and industrial fields. However, fragmented perspectives and approaches to digital well-being in AI-powered systems hinder a holistic understanding, leaving researchers and practitioners struggling to design truly human-centered AI systems.
Objective: This paper aims to address the fragmentation by synthesizing diverse perspectives and approaches to digital well-being through a systematic literature review.
J Med Internet Res
September 2025
School of Pharmacy, Sungkyunkwan University, Gyeonggi-do, Republic of Korea.
Background: Owing to the unique characteristics of digital health interventions (DHIs), a tailored approach to economic evaluation is needed-one that is distinct from that used for pharmacotherapy. However, the absence of clear guidelines in this area is a substantial gap in the evaluation framework.
Objective: This study aims to systematically review and compare the economic evaluation literature on DHIs and pharmacotherapy for the treatment of depression.
JAMA Psychiatry
September 2025
Norman Fixel Institute for Neurological Diseases, University of Florida, Gainesville.
Importance: Behavioral variant frontotemporal dementia (bvFTD), the most common subtype of FTD, is a leading form of early-onset dementia worldwide. Accurate and timely diagnosis of bvFTD is frequently delayed due to symptoms overlapping with common psychiatric disorders, and interest has increased in identifying biomarkers that may aid in differentiating bvFTD from psychiatric disorders.
Objective: To summarize and critically review studies examining whether neurofilament light chain (NfL) in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) or blood is a viable aid in the differential diagnosis of bvFTD vs psychiatric disorders.
JAMA Netw Open
September 2025
Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, University of California San Diego, La Jolla.
Importance: Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors are highly effective medications for several immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs). However, safety concerns have led to regulatory restrictions.
Objective: To compare the risk of adverse events with JAK inhibitors vs tumor necrosis factor (TNF) antagonists in patients with IMIDs in head-to-head comparative effectiveness studies.